Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Cognitive Therapy and Research 3/2020

11-03-2020 | Original Article

How Anxious are You Right Now? Using Ecological Momentary Assessment to Evaluate the Effects of Cognitive Bias Modification for Social Threat Interpretations

Auteurs: Katharine E. Daniel, Alexander R. Daros, Miranda L. Beltzer, Mehdi Boukhechba, Laura E. Barnes, Bethany A. Teachman

Gepubliceerd in: Cognitive Therapy and Research | Uitgave 3/2020

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Background

Reducing one’s tendency to interpret ambiguous situations negatively can improve symptoms of social anxiety. This study examines the effectiveness of a 1-week period of online Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretations (CBM-I) for socially anxious individuals. In addition to measuring intervention effectiveness through traditional trait measures, this study investigates whether associated state measures are sensitive to intervention effects in daily life.

Methods

One-hundred and six participants scoring high on a measure of trait social anxiety completed two in-lab sessions separated by 5 weeks of ecological momentary assessment, with 51 participants randomly assigned to receive the online CBM-I intervention halfway through the 5-week monitoring period.

Results

CBM-I training was more effective than monitoring alone in reducing trait negative interpretation bias, indicating target engagement. However, this change was not reliably accompanied by changes on other cognitive processing style outcomes. Further, while trait and state social anxiety symptoms and fear of negative evaluation improved, these changes were not unique to the CBM-I intervention group.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates the challenges and opportunities associated with investigating intervention effects in daily life.
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Voetnoten
1
To be comprehensive, given that we assessed for momentary use of 19 emotion regulation strategies as part of the larger study and that CBM-I may have effects on multiple strategies, we include exploratory analyses for the remaining strategies in the online supplement, but only lay out a hypothesis for cognitive reappraisal.
 
2
Analyses were originally run on all participants who returned to the follow-up lab session, regardless of whether or not they initiated the CBM-I intervention. However, in line with previous studies that defined intent to treat samples as those who initiated treatment (Ji, Meyer, & Teachman, under review), we re-ran all analyses on the sample described above. Notably, the pattern of results did not change.
 
3
A full list of measures that were included in the larger study can be obtained by contacting the first author. No variables beyond those that are reported were analyzed for the current paper.
 
Literatuur
go back to reference Amir, N., Beard, C., & Bower, E. (2005). Interpretation bias and social anxiety. Cognitive Therapy and Research,29(4), 433–443.CrossRef Amir, N., Beard, C., & Bower, E. (2005). Interpretation bias and social anxiety. Cognitive Therapy and Research,29(4), 433–443.CrossRef
go back to reference Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software,67(1), 1–48.CrossRef Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software,67(1), 1–48.CrossRef
go back to reference Boswell, J. F., Kraus, D. R., Miller, S. D., & Lambert, M. J. (2015). Implementing routine outcome monitoring in clinical practice: Benefits, challenges, and solutions. Psychother Res,25(1), 6–19.CrossRef Boswell, J. F., Kraus, D. R., Miller, S. D., & Lambert, M. J. (2015). Implementing routine outcome monitoring in clinical practice: Benefits, challenges, and solutions. Psychother Res,25(1), 6–19.CrossRef
go back to reference Brooks, M. E., Kristensen, K., van Benthem, K. J., Magnusson, A., Berg, C. W., Nielsen, A., et al. (2017). glmmTBM balances speed and flexibility among packages for zero-inflated generalized linear mixed modeling. The R Journal,9(2), 378–400.CrossRef Brooks, M. E., Kristensen, K., van Benthem, K. J., Magnusson, A., Berg, C. W., Nielsen, A., et al. (2017). glmmTBM balances speed and flexibility among packages for zero-inflated generalized linear mixed modeling. The R Journal,9(2), 378–400.CrossRef
go back to reference Chisholm, D., Sweeney, K., Sheehan, P., Rasmussen, B., Smit, F., Cuijpers, P., et al. (2016). Scaling-up treatment of depression and anxiety: A global return on investment analysis. The Lancet Psychiatry,3(5), 415–424.CrossRef Chisholm, D., Sweeney, K., Sheehan, P., Rasmussen, B., Smit, F., Cuijpers, P., et al. (2016). Scaling-up treatment of depression and anxiety: A global return on investment analysis. The Lancet Psychiatry,3(5), 415–424.CrossRef
go back to reference Clark, D. M., Salkovskis, P. M., Pst, L. G., Breitholtz, E., Koehler, K. A., Westling, B. E., et al. (1997). Misinterpretation of body sensations in panic disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,65, 203–2013.CrossRef Clark, D. M., Salkovskis, P. M., Pst, L. G., Breitholtz, E., Koehler, K. A., Westling, B. E., et al. (1997). Misinterpretation of body sensations in panic disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,65, 203–2013.CrossRef
go back to reference Grant, B. F., Hasin, D. S., Blanco, C., Stinson, F. S., Chou, S. P., Goldstein, R. B., et al. (2005). The epidemiology of social anxiety disorder in the United States: Results from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 66(11), 1351–1361. https://doi.org/10.4088/jcp.v66n1102.CrossRefPubMed Grant, B. F., Hasin, D. S., Blanco, C., Stinson, F. S., Chou, S. P., Goldstein, R. B., et al. (2005). The epidemiology of social anxiety disorder in the United States: Results from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 66(11), 1351–1361. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4088/​jcp.​v66n1102.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Gutl, C., Rizzardini, R. H., Chang, V., & Morales, M. (2014). Attrition in MOOC: Lessions learned from drop-out students. In L. Uden, J. Sinclair, Y. H. Tao, & D. Liberona (Eds.), L Learning technology for education in cloud. MOOD and big data. LTEC 2014. Communications in computer and information science (Vol. 446). Cham: Springer. Gutl, C., Rizzardini, R. H., Chang, V., & Morales, M. (2014). Attrition in MOOC: Lessions learned from drop-out students. In L. Uden, J. Sinclair, Y. H. Tao, & D. Liberona (Eds.), L Learning technology for education in cloud. MOOD and big data. LTEC 2014. Communications in computer and information science (Vol. 446). Cham: Springer.
go back to reference Hofmann, S. G. (2000). Treatment of social phobia: Potential mediators and moderators. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice,7, 3–16. Hofmann, S. G. (2000). Treatment of social phobia: Potential mediators and moderators. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice,7, 3–16.
go back to reference Hofmann, S. G. (2007). Cognitive factors that maintain social anxiety disorder: A comprehensive model and its treatment implications. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy,36(4), 193–209.CrossRef Hofmann, S. G. (2007). Cognitive factors that maintain social anxiety disorder: A comprehensive model and its treatment implications. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy,36(4), 193–209.CrossRef
go back to reference Holmes, E. A., Lang, T. J., & Shah, D. M. (2009). Developing interpretation bias modification as a “cognitive vaccine” for depressed mood: Imagining positive events makes you feel better than thinking about them verbally. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 118(1), 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012590.CrossRefPubMed Holmes, E. A., Lang, T. J., & Shah, D. M. (2009). Developing interpretation bias modification as a “cognitive vaccine” for depressed mood: Imagining positive events makes you feel better than thinking about them verbally. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 118(1), 76–88. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​a0012590.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Ji, J. L., Meyer, M. J., & Teachman, B. (under review). Facilitating episodic simulation in anxiety: Role of sensory scaffolding and scenario modality. Ji, J. L., Meyer, M. J., & Teachman, B. (under review). Facilitating episodic simulation in anxiety: Role of sensory scaffolding and scenario modality.
go back to reference Kuckertz, J. M., & Amir, N. (2014). Cognitive biases in social anxiety disorder. In S. G. Hofmann & P. M. DiBartolo (Eds.), Social anxiety: Clinical developmental, and social perspectives (3rd ed., pp. 483–510). New York: Academic Press.CrossRef Kuckertz, J. M., & Amir, N. (2014). Cognitive biases in social anxiety disorder. In S. G. Hofmann & P. M. DiBartolo (Eds.), Social anxiety: Clinical developmental, and social perspectives (3rd ed., pp. 483–510). New York: Academic Press.CrossRef
go back to reference Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software,82(13), 1–26.CrossRef Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software,82(13), 1–26.CrossRef
go back to reference Mattick, R. P., & Clarke, J. C. (1998). Development and validation of measures of social phobia scrutiny fear and social interaction anxiety. Behaviour Research and Therapy,36(4), 455–470.CrossRef Mattick, R. P., & Clarke, J. C. (1998). Development and validation of measures of social phobia scrutiny fear and social interaction anxiety. Behaviour Research and Therapy,36(4), 455–470.CrossRef
go back to reference Namaky, N., Glenne, J. J., Eberle, J. W., & Teachman, B. A. (under review). Adapting cognitive bias modification to train healthy prospection. Namaky, N., Glenne, J. J., Eberle, J. W., & Teachman, B. A. (under review). Adapting cognitive bias modification to train healthy prospection.
go back to reference Olfson, M., Shea, S., Feder, A., Fuentes, M., Nomura, Y., Gameroff, M., et al. (2000). Prevalence of anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders in an urban general medicine practice. Archives of Family Medicine,9(9), 876–883.CrossRef Olfson, M., Shea, S., Feder, A., Fuentes, M., Nomura, Y., Gameroff, M., et al. (2000). Prevalence of anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders in an urban general medicine practice. Archives of Family Medicine,9(9), 876–883.CrossRef
go back to reference R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Metagegevens
Titel
How Anxious are You Right Now? Using Ecological Momentary Assessment to Evaluate the Effects of Cognitive Bias Modification for Social Threat Interpretations
Auteurs
Katharine E. Daniel
Alexander R. Daros
Miranda L. Beltzer
Mehdi Boukhechba
Laura E. Barnes
Bethany A. Teachman
Publicatiedatum
11-03-2020
Uitgeverij
Springer US
Gepubliceerd in
Cognitive Therapy and Research / Uitgave 3/2020
Print ISSN: 0147-5916
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2819
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-020-10088-2

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2020

Cognitive Therapy and Research 3/2020 Naar de uitgave